---
title: "Wanda"
year: 1970
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/wanda"
fi1m_id: "wanda"
imdb_id: "tt0067961"
tmdb_id: 80560
wikidata_id: "Q381528"
fi1m_score: 83
critics_score: 77
critics_reviews: 7
published: "2026-09-26T17:29:50.374529+00:00"
updated: "2026-09-26T17:29:51.307453+00:00"
region: "ES"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Wanda (1970)

Directed by Barbara Loden · 1h 43m · Drama, Crime

## Identity

Wanda

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/wanda
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** wanda
- **IMDb ID:** tt0067961
- **TMDB ID:** 80560
- **Wikidata ID:** Q381528
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067961/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/80560, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q381528

**Fi1m score: 83** · Critics 77 from 7 reviews

*In a sentence:* Barbara Loden makes us watch a woman most films would hurry past

> Barbara Loden’s *Wanda* is a moving character study, carried by her unshowy performance and Nicholas T. Proferes’s rough, intimate photography. Its wandering pace occasionally tests patience, but we recommend staying with it.

## Synopsis

Wanda Goronski (Barbara Loden) moves through harsh surroundings, with hardship shaping her encounters. The people in her life include Mr. Dennis (Michael Higgins), her sister (Dorothy Shupenes) and her husband (Jerome Thier). As Wanda wanders, the story stays close to her experience, following a woman whose vulnerability does not entirely extinguish her resilience. Crime forms part of that experience, alongside the daily difficulty of getting by. The film follows her dealings with other people from one encounter to the next.

## Review

*Wanda* is worth the patience it asks for, chiefly because Barbara Loden makes its central woman so difficult to dismiss. Her performance as Wanda Goronski gives this wandering crime drama its hold on us. There is nothing brisk or reassuring about the way it proceeds, and some stretches do drag. But the film takes hardship seriously without treating the person experiencing it as a specimen. We recommend it, with the warning that much of its force comes quietly.

Her acting is unusually free of the little signals that tell us a performance is under way. She lets Wanda be vulnerable without asking us to approve of her, and she never makes the character’s resilience a cause for applause. We were moved by how exposed she seems in those harsh surroundings. That unshowy acting made the hardship harder to shrug off. We kept attending to Wanda, even when she was difficult to understand.

Nicholas T. Proferes’s handheld photography makes the surroundings hard to ignore. The grain keeps the image rough, while the camera’s movement gives it an unsettled closeness. There is beauty here, but it does not make hardship look like an appealing way to live. The photography works because it gives the woman and her surroundings equal weight. We are allowed to notice what is around Wanda without losing sight of the person trying to get through it.

He also edits, allowing the film’s wanderings to determine the pace rather than pushing us rapidly towards the next development. Barbara Loden’s unforced acting benefits from the time he gives it. The drawback is a slackness that becomes harder to overlook when Wanda herself is difficult to read. We can be left studying a performance without finding much new in it. A little tightening would have made the slow stretches more absorbing, without turning this into a different sort of film.

As writer and director, Barbara Loden keeps the attention firmly on Wanda, and that concentration has a cost. The people around her are less absorbing, including Michael Higgins’s Mr. Dennis. We are interested in what they bring out in her, but they do not stay with us in quite the same way. This makes the film feel narrower than it needs to. Still, the central performance has enough uncertainty in it to withstand such close attention without becoming a simple illustration of suffering.

Anyone coming to *Wanda* chiefly for the crime may find its priorities frustrating. It concentrates on following this woman and makes few concessions to an appetite for brisk plotting. At 103 minutes, it nevertheless feels longer than its running time suggests. That is the caveat we would give alongside a warm recommendation. Choose it for an evening when watching a person closely sounds like enough; Barbara Loden makes that attention worthwhile.

*Fi1m score 83, published 26 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

Most critics respond warmly to Wanda, with praise clustering around its close observation of hardship, Loden’s performance and the rough grain of its photography. The reviews describe a compassionate character study, finding vulnerability, resilience and unforced feeling in her acting. The New Yorker particularly values the physical force of the handheld cinematography, while other positive accounts praise the calm direction and the beauty found in harsh surroundings.

The recorded scores range from mixed to strongly positive, with five positive assessments and no negative ones, but the reasons for the lower ratings remain unclear. The New York Times review is only partially accessible, with no identifiable verdict, while The Playlist’s text is unavailable. Neither therefore supplies a confirmed objection to set against the praise. The available commentary suggests broad agreement; the incomplete sources prevent a reliable account of where reservations lie.

## Straight answers

**Is Wanda worth watching?**

*Wanda* is worth watching for its moving central performance and rough, intimate photography, and we score it 83 out of 100. We recommend it to anyone drawn to patient character studies, with the caveat that its wandering pace sometimes drags and its interest in crime comes second to watching Wanda closely.

**How long is Wanda, and what is it rated?**

*Wanda* runs 1h 43m. It is a drama and crime film.

**Where can I watch Wanda in Spain?**

*Wanda* is not on any streaming or rental service in Spain at the moment. It is available in 1 other country; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.

**How violent or frightening is Wanda, and is it suitable for children?**

*Wanda* has a US PG certificate and no UK certificate supplied here, so parental guidance is the available age-rating advice. The certificate alone does not establish how violent or frightening individual scenes are; we would steer younger children towards something else because this slow drama concentrates on crime, vulnerability and hardship.

**How does Wanda compare to Vagabond?**

*Wanda* and [*Vagabond*](https://film.one/film/vagabond) are both moving studies of difficult women, and we recommend both for their refusal to make their subjects easy to like. *Wanda* stays close to its central character but sometimes drags; *Vagabond* builds its portrait through a succession of witnesses that can feel too neatly arranged, making the choice more about approach than a clear difference in quality.

**What should I watch after Wanda?**

After *Wanda*, try [*Vagabond*](https://film.one/film/vagabond) (1985, Fi1m 90): Another difficult woman on the road, observed without the usual consolations. Then [*Rosetta*](https://film.one/film/rosetta) (1999, Fi1m 82): A young woman’s struggle for work gives hardship a different, urgent rhythm; and [*Nights of Cabiria*](https://film.one/film/nights-of-cabiria) (1957, Fi1m 88): Another vulnerable woman receives close attention, with more bustle, humour and spectacle.

### Reviews we read (7)

- **Los Angeles Times**, Justin Chang (90/100, inferred): Chang regards Loden’s film as an astonishing, still-vital landmark and a searingly honest character study. He especially praises its grainy visual texture, which finds unexpected beauty in Wanda’s harsh surroundings. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-wanda-review-20180803-story.html)
- **The New Yorker**, Richard Brody (90/100, inferred): Brody gives the film an appreciative assessment, describing its approach as intimate and formally distinctive. He especially praises the jolting physical power of its textures and handheld cinematography. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/wanda)
- **Slant Magazine**, Chuck Bowen (4/5): Bowen praises the film’s compassionate, finely observed portrait of hardship and its rough-and-tumble Criterion presentation. He singles out Loden’s performance for its expressive blend of naturalism and pathos. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/blu-ray-review-barbara-lodens-wanda-on-the-criterion-collection/)
- **Variety**, Variety Staff (75/100, inferred): The review finds the film increasingly insightful and impactful. It praises Loden’s calm direction and her vulnerable, resilient performance. [Read](https://variety.com/1969/film/reviews/wanda-1117796191/)
- **Time Out**, DP (70/100, inferred): The review presents the film as subtly picaresque. It singles out its 16mm photography, blown up to 35mm, and the wanderings of its central character. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/wanda)
- **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The page appears to be a review of the 1970 film, but its verdict is unavailable. The accessible content does not reveal what the critic singled out for praise or complaint. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/movies/new-dvds-wanda.html)
- **The Playlist** (64/100, inferred): The page was blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be confirmed. No praise or complaint from the review was available to identify. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/wanda-review-20180727/)

## Details

- **Director:** Barbara Loden
- **Director:** Barbara Loden
- **Writer:** Barbara Loden
- **Cinematography:** Nicholas T. Proferes
- **Editor:** Nicholas T. Proferes
- **Producer:** Harry Shuster
- **Cast:** Barbara Loden as Wanda Goronski; Michael Higgins as Mr. Dennis; Dorothy Shupenes as Wanda's Sister; Peter Shupenes as Brother In Law; Jerome Thier as Husband; Marian Thier as Miss Godek; Valerie Mamches as Girl in Roadhouse; Anthony Rotell as Tony
- **Runtime:** 1h 43m
- **First release (Italy):** 21 August 1970
- **Genres:** Drama, Crime
- **Budget:** $115,000
- **Box office:** $108,522

## Where to watch in Spain

Not streaming, renting or buying in Spain at the last check.

Also available in: US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## If you liked this

- *Vagabond* (1985), Fi1m 90: Another difficult woman on the road, observed without the usual consolations. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/vagabond.md)
- *Wendy and Lucy* (2008): Small practical setbacks become serious trouble in another patient study of hardship.
- *Rosetta* (1999), Fi1m 82: A young woman’s struggle for work gives hardship a different, urgent rhythm. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/rosetta.md)
- *Nights of Cabiria* (1957), Fi1m 88: Another vulnerable woman receives close attention, with more bustle, humour and spectacle. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/nights-of-cabiria.md)
- *Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore* (1974): A woman’s uncertain fresh start, with more humour and room to breathe.

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/wanda